For one sodamy is illegal in MD how you going to consummate? So not a marriage on that point. Can go on all day.

"As a matter of fact, the fact that the government concerns itself with the private institution of marriage in the first place, heterosexual or otherwise, is a textbook example of government overreach"

BINGO Michael, the same post i came here to make.

and jack, by definition, there are numerous married heterosexual persons who partake in acts of 'sodomy'. its far more than just 'gay' sex.... since you mentioned it. i too could go on, but i'll keep it PG.

Hey read your paper it is NOT civil that's talked about its changing definition of marriage. I support civil unions NOT marriage!

Good point these reps think their not going to be held accountable ...wrong!

Lawrence v. Texas was the case that struck down sodomy laws in 2003. Besides, from a legal standpoint there's nothing saying a marriage has to be consummated by a sex act for it to be considered valid by the state. Why don't you just say, " I don't like gay people so I don't think they deserve equal protection under the law."?

another spot on reply my Michael...

as the saying goes "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge "

let me leave this article in saying whether you are for or against 'gay' marriage i think it is in everyone's best interest to remove govt involvement in the sanctity of marriage in the first place....

Good question, Marriage always for thousands of years man and woman to protect family unit, the majority does not want this it's that simple they will not rest till they have total acceptance and that will not happen.

Jack, marriage wasn't even considered a sacrament by the catholic church (the ONLY church for centuries at that time) until 1563 in the Council of Trent. For thousands of years women were the property of their husbands. Then religion had to "evolve" admitting women would not be property. The church was forced to "evolve" by advances in society that disliked religious primitivism . Same happened when after thousands of years of prohibiting interracial marriages ended with the US Supreme Court decision in 1967 Loving vs Virginia. Again the churches had to be dragged kicking & screaming into "evolving" towards a more just society. At all points the church has had to be forced into "evolving" away from gross injustice. How about the thousands of years it promoted slavery? It took a Civil War to settle that one out & still 100yrs more to end the segregation religion imposed. Was the church right in defending slavery? The bible says slavery is OK. Well, society has advanced beyond such puny ideas & the only way we can live with religion is by ignoring the VAST MAJORITY of biblical commands. For if we dared live biblical lifestyles, we'd be as savage as the fanatical morons who blew-up the World Trade Center on 9-11-01. Those guys HAD faith. Commendable, NO, but an example of where blind faith leads.

I feel the same way about straight people. Common ground!

I don't spend my time musing & wondering what people in love do to each other. I think you spend too much time wondering about the personal lives of others. Does this say something about you?

Becky - I agree with your right to equal voice and I think you make some valid points, but your argument that the government is trying to strip us of our right to religious freedom by extending rights to others seems a bit contradictory to me, can you explain it further? It seems to me that by letting our government know that it is ok to deny civil rights to some of its citizens (homosexuals), we are inadvertently telling them that it is ok deny our rights as well, including our right to practice Christianity.

Christianity under attack???!!! Wake up!! I am 50yrs old. I never saw religion so darned strong as now. And THAT is the problem. Millionaires & religion holding hands despite Jesus himself saying it was easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than a rich person getting to heaven! The churches are busy molesting children, hiding & protecting the molesters, busy raking million$ on ill-begotten funds, the poor being exploited, mugabuck corporation$ screwdriving the public BUT the churches are complaing of being persecuted because somewhere a gay couple wants to get married? Methinks the church ought contemplate divorcing itself from its corruption & abandon its addiction to $!!! If social ills bother you so much, how about doing something about some of these topics: murder, drugs, wall street malfeasanse of million$, corrupt banks, child abuse, oppresion of women, environmental degradation & pollution, etc. These are just a very few of the THOUSANDS of issues that affect EVERYONES lives & POCKETS/WALLETS many, many, many, many, many THOUSANDS of times more than some gay couple somewhere wanting to get married. If that gay couple affects you so much it says much more about you than of them. Maybe you need to examine your life. Or at least get a true perspective on what your true priorities in life ought to be. A happy gay couple somewhere affects society far less than a corrupt Wall Street millionaire stealing million$ & getting away with it. Does religion get it?

You are saying that because I am a Christian, I am not capable of my own thoughts and beliefs. No, because I am a Christian, I choose to love God, and I choose to follow his teachings, and I choose which morals and values are important to me. Yes, we are supposed to live in a country where we can believe in any type of god, but if you can't see that our current government is trying to strip of us of that right, than you are going through your life with your eyes closed.

Becky, no one is trying to strip you of the right to follow your religion. It is a matter of fairness. Attempt to remove your religious blinders for a moment & try to see life as someone else might. Let's say a different religion predominated, one that considered your marriage to your husband innexistent. Both of you would have to file separate & single income taxes at a higher rate despite the 30+yrs you have lived together. If heaven forbid, either one of you got ill, the other would be denied visitation or decision rights at hospitals. Imagine yourself being forcibly kept away from your husband's deathbed, and later from the funeral. Of course, no chance of burial together either. And after his death, the home you both built & paid for 30yrs is forcibly sold so estate taxes can be paid & so the detested hubby's cousin Edna (the one never liked hubby marrying you) gets to inherit the house while you go homeless & destitute. How about all those years both of you spent thousands because you couldn't carry each other in your health/life insurance policies? And in the meanwhile Christians would go about calling you names & spraypainting insulting graffitti upon your car! Please Becky, do try understand how others live. Just as your marriage hurts no one (except perhaps obnoxious cousin Edna's ego), some gay couple somewhere getting married hurts you none either!

The government exists for all the people, not just particular religions. Moreover if you are so adamant about following the bible yourself, then make sure to follow it entirely. You'd better not eat porkchops, ham, cracklins, clams, oysters, crabs, lobster, shrimp or rabbit to name a few . Wear all clothing made of the same fabric (mixing fabrics is a sin, look it up - Deuteronomy 22:11). Make sure your hairbrush has no boar bristles (coming into contact with pig is a sin - Leviticus, Deuteronomy). So don't ever touch a football, baseball, a baseball mitt or pigskin jacket. Don't brush your teeth (a sin too). Grow a long beard & hair, don't trim your nails or be cursed like Sampson (must ban barbershops!). Heaven forbid you touch your wife during her period. She's unclean (Leviticus 15:19-30 & 20:18, Ezekiel 18:5-6). Send her to the shed until it passes. By the way, get rid of the pooch. Dogs are vile says the bible (Proberbs 26:11).

After your wife returns home from the shed, make sure she burns all her jewelry & expensive, frivolous attires - they are sinful (1 Timothy 2:9). Do not permit your wife to complain. She has to take it IN SILENCE (1 Corinthians 14:34-36), 1 Timothy 2:11-15, Ephesians 5:22-24, 1 Peter 3:1). Have her cover herself in veils moslem-style or else shave her head like Kojak (1 Corinthians 5-6). Make sure you spare not the rod & really clobber your kids (Proberbs 13:24). If any of them ever talks back to you, make sure to kill them (Exodus 21:17) or at least stone them to death (Deuteronomy 21: 18 - 21). Have financial problems? Have you considered selling your daughter as a slave? Exodus 21:7 says you can! But remember to give the church 10% of the sale price! Moreover, slavery is good for her. If she runs away from her master, return her to him (Titus 2:9-10, 1 Peter 2:18, Philemon 10-15). And the absurdity list goes on & on if you want to live a biblical life. You go on & live life as you want it, but don't try to impose your ideology upon the rest of us.

Pamela Beidle -- and Robert Costa -- congratulations for thinking about this issue in very personal terms and then voting your consciences. Govenment has no business enforcing one religion's position at the expense of equal protection under the law, regardless of how strongly some people hold those views. This is not a theocracy. And the referendum will be extremely close -- no crushing involved ...

The point though is that people should have the right to make that decision on their own, correct?

They're interjecting religion into this because they can't come up with a Constitutional argument against gay marriage (there isn't one) so they have to come up with a Biblical one. Thankfully some lawmakers understand it's the Constitution, not the Bible, that serves as the basic framework for our nation.

So I guess that means you are radical muslim who believes homosexuals and adulterers should be stoned. Obviously not a christian

Your argument is irrelevant to me as I do not believe in God. This country is not a theocracy. Many of the founding fathers were Deist, NOT practicing Christians, thus why the Constitution includes the idea of separation of church and state. Civil marriage is a civil right - for everyone - simple as that. Religion does not trump civil law in the USA - or at least it shouldn't, according to the Constitution.

John, go read your bible or whatever and leave the rest of us alone. You obviously see agreement as the only acceptable belief and ask a bunch of loaded rhetorical questions to prove your point. Whether you like it or not you are going to be living in a state that recognizes homosexual unions as legal. Whether whatever sect you belong to does is yours/their business, but legally it will be recognized. Get over it or move to MS or or Pakistan. Have a nice day

John - not sure what marriage has to do with the Bible. Are non-Christians allowed to get married? Because...and this might come as a shock, but not all religions believe in the Bible.

The bible permits slavery & said it was good. The bible was wrong. The bible permits you to sell your daughter into slavery. The bible was wrong. The bible allows you to legally murder your children. The bible was wrong. The bible says women should be all covered up, never speak unless spoken to & never ask questions in public but to the husband in private. Moreover women belong to menfolk as property. The bible was wrong. The bible says the world is only about 6,000 yrs old. The bible was wrong. The bible says that the world is flat. The bible was wrong. The bible says that the universe spins about the world. The bible was wrong. Seems to me the bible has a darned BAD record. Throw in the fact that 99% of all wars in history are religious in origin + all the atrocities committed in the name of religion and I can understand why the founding fathers separated religion & state. I prefer to stand with Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, George Mason & George Washington over theocrats anytime. If you don't like some gay couple marrying somewhere, move to Iran. Supposedly there are no gays there. And if they are, a wall is pulled over them or else they are publicly executed "with compassion" because they hate the sin but not the sinner.

Seems funny that 50 years ago, people were worried that JFK won't be able to be president because he would be taking orders from the Vatican. Now everyone is upset that American politicians aren't taking orders from the Vatican.

There is nothing wrong with separating private religious belief from public policy.

According to the US Constitution government exists for THE People. It doesn't say it exists just for catholics, baptists, methodists, evangelicals, jews or moslems. It says for The People. That also means that government should be fair & equal towards all The People regardless what faith or even lack thereoff. So religion should & ought not have a saying about issues of equality. This is a matter for justice. If you are against gay marriage, then don't marry someone gay. But just as we have no say about who you marry & how you live your life, let us live our lives in peace. Otherwise, if misguided attempts to dictate religion into the government suceed, someday some other religious doctrine might become powerful & may outlaw your (catholic, evangelical, jewish, muslim, etc.) "lifestyle".

Thank you Tim -- it's good to see your standards in action. I would like my comment regarding Mr. Costa, that he is an honorable man who voted his conscience, to remain on the record.

would you consider getting rid of the "rabid homos" statement way up above?

David, for the record, I have no issues with gays, so please do not assume my beliefs. In order to be accurate, I came into my office in a hurry after attending another meeting before session. There were about 10 people trying to come through my office door as I, with my brace and crutches was attempting to leave for another meeting before session. You asked if you could walk with me and I said I didn't mind, and you in fact walked me to the elevator. I even indicated that I remembered you from our conversation last year. You did ask me if there was anything that you could do to change my position and I gave you an honest answer indicating in the negative. I NEVER said "SHUSH" as regardless of my positions, I always encourage the dialogue. I told you that it was my faith and upbringing that formed my values and my position and as I attempted to comment about the bill itself and the problems with the religious exceptions that give me concern, I entered the elevator to go to my next appointment. The door closed, I went to my next appointment. My comments on the house floor were consistent with my issues over the religious exception.

Ms. Vitale, my gentleman instinct moves me towards considering the incident a case of misunderstanding; perhaps my sense of hearing is going because of all the years I have been going to the legislature as a voice in the wilderness pleading for redress of grievance as the US Constitution allows. If I caused offense "assuming" your beliefs, I apologize. In my defense I merely point out at the 10 years I have spent trying to address marriage equality with you and various of your predecessors (none of whom throughout 10yrs would even meet with us - except last year when you met my group for approx 5 - 10 mins & McConkey met us for about 20mins). And if you look at some of the postings about, you will understand how much some people despise us because of their faith without even pausing to listen. Again, if I misheard or misunderstood you I apologize. But I still think that the Constitution guarantees equality irrespective of religious doctrine.

Hello Hearts. I prefer the King James bible. Beautiful, poetic Elizabethan English, like Shakespeare. But ANY bible would should agree according to book, chapter & verse. The wording may differ but the ACTUAL meaning remains, unless it is some ideologically-driven hack job that changes the words & meaning to suit the agenda of the church that promotes the version. Beware of something called "The Patriot's Bible". The cover of one I saw has a statue of liberty clothed in the US flag & holding up a bible instead of the torch of liberty. Reminds me of what my grandfather said about scoundrels wrapping themselves in the flag as a refuge to avoid detection & prosecution. Anyhow, in that bible I saw wording was changed to suit an ideological agenda. Look it up yourself if you want. Make sure you read same passage at various bible versions & compare among themselves & with the so-called "Patriot's". I think you will come to the same conclusion I did. But investigate yourself, don't take mine or anyone's word. The mind is the best tool mankind has & using it we may arrive at the truth.

You are right, but as an elected representative these politicians are supposed to represent all citizen constituents no matter what faith, no faith, color, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc. If they have an opposite point of view, they could have stated it respectfully in a dignified way. I am a grownup, I have lived 50yrs in the world, I know how to "take it on the chin" & how to get along with others. But still I have a hard time believing these politicians would have treated any other citizen the way we were over any other topic. But you are right this is a high 5 moment. Equal marriage is on the way & 50yrs hence people will wonder what the hoopla denying equality was all about.

Nobody's asking you to change your faith or your personal opinion regarding the matter. Seems to me like any conservative worth his salt should be able to comprehend the Constitution to the point of understanding that some things don't lie within the boundaries of power we've granted the government; in this case the government has no power to regulate who can and can't get married.

Sir, you would benefit from experiencing yourself how others live. It will expand your mental horizons. That way you would understand what we are asking for & would realize we want what ALL people want...Life, Liberty & the Pursuit of Happiness. A gay couple achieving happiness hinders your happiness not one iota, unless the complainer be a closet case.

Amy, you would certainly benefit from some enlightening. Let me try...imagine yourself a despised minority. All the days of your life preachers, teachers, family, classmates, society & even "god" tells you that you are wicked, despicable, evil, vile & depraved. You must constantly hide what you are because discovery would mean the loss of family, friends, social standing & could culminate in a few throrough beatings or at worse death. But even after death you are persecuted, because even heaven is denied to you. Any love & peace you may achieve may be lost at the wim of a crowd or societal turmoil. Parents whom you love, siblings whom you adore, may curse at you or worse, and you may be cut off from them. No matter how much good you do in life, you are still despised. Unless you are a masochist you would want some happiness in your life. Someone to share life with. Can you now know why we want marriage? Or is your heart so blinded that its made of stone? But guess what? We still exist. We have existed from the beginning of mankind and will continue to do so, because we are also human & our humanity cannot be denied even by puny imaginations. We will cease to exist when humans are manufactured. But guess what? By that point there will be no true humans and the likes of you will not exist either.

As for angry crowds threatening our legislators - I have a hard time imagining marauding hordes of homosexuals terrorizing the countryside. Where are you going to get so many of us when we are outnumbered at least 10 to 1 in life? You ought to think in terms of the tyranny of the religiously fanatical. And if anything all the angry crowds I observed were anti-marriage equality. All the ladies & gentlemen I saw petitioning our legislature as per our right under the US Constitution were all very civilized, calm & deferential. Maybe you were having a dream in which you projected your apocalyptic fantasies unto us. As Socrates would have told you, "know thyself".

Another thing you fail to consider is that politicians LOVE to talk to people. THAT is how they make their living. A politician who cuts-off conversation with constituents will NOT last long in office. I have spoken to politicians for years in all states I have lived at and they ALL LOVED to talk. Except now. And sorry, but based upon my past experience I still believe had I been wanting to talk about casino gambling, tax breaks for some megacorporation or even (gasp!) legalizing prostitution of illegal alien coal miners from outer space, these representatives would have been willing to listen & talk.

Marriage equality has NOTHING to do with multiple partners. It has to do with monogamous couples looking to make a life together & wrest any happiness they can out of this vale of tears called life. And marriage implies age of consent, thus requires adulthood. If you want to criticize anything how about Newt Gingrich's 3 marriages, or Britney Spears' 24hr marriage, or Anna Nicole Smith's marriage to the 95yr-old millionaire? Since those clown's marriages were legal, why not that of a gay couple who has lived together faithfully for 30+yrs? Your problem hmj is that you lack any real Constitutional or even practical reasons to oppose marriage equality.

Hi Jack, Just wanted to address your questions about deleting your comments. Whenever a Patch editor (moderator) deletes a comment from a reader, we note it with our own comment, the reason why it was deleted and a link to our Terms of Use (as Tim Lemke did above).
However, there is an opportunity for other readers to "flag" comments as inappropriate and if they receive enough flags, the system automatically deletes it from the site. I looked into it and it seems as though that's what happened with some of your comments—and many others on this thread.
Patch does not take sides on issues and I just wanted to be clear on that. Thanks everyone for commenting and doing your best to keep your comments civil.

Your argument assumes the existence of a god. Secondly, even if you do believe "God" exists, the Bible was written by men - long after Jesus was dead. I take the Bible as seriously as I take Greek mythology - not as fact, or reality, but as a historical vestige of old stories and sayings. Someday, Christianity will be a religion relegated to the history books, just as many ancient religions are now currently - and something else will take it's place as dominant religion.

And people say that the pro gay marriage folks engage in name calling? I don't recall anyone on the pro gay marriage side calling anyone an ABOMONATION (sic).

Just an observation.

That doesn't even make sense.

You presume that those who believe that people deserve to live their lives in peace without interference are themselves homosexual? Or are they deviant simply because they don't go out of their way to restrict others' lives? Tell you what, if you want to live the way people did 2000 years ago go right ahead. Just don't get too upset when people come out of the woodwork to criticize your "logic" because it's based on Bronze Age superstition.

Also, nobody's denying you your 1st amendment rights as you're in no way being penalized for expressing your opinions here. Leave the hyperbole at home.

"your actions show otherwise you cram down our throats your lifestyles"

Really? You're now going to be forced to be gay? That's news to me!

The difficult thing about the freedom to choose is accepting the fact that some people are going to make different choices than you.

The only lifestyle being crammed down people's throats is the "straight" lifestyle by Christians like you.

For thousands of years upon marriage women became the property of their husbands. For thousands of years you could only marry within your own class. For thousands of years you could only marry within your race. For thousands of years religion said NOTHING to alleviate such injustice. Same with slavery. Then came the Age of Enlightenment & religion was forced to gradually evolve into fairness. Religious opposition to marriage equality is just the latest case in which religion chooses the side of injustice & is gradually forced into evolving into a more accepting society. By the way, irrational fanaticisms can also be considered mental illness.

You could always just stop reading the comments for this article.

And if you're tired of getting the emails, the "stop following" link at the top of the comments will make them stop.

That's funny, I figured comments/debate/discussion would be allowed on the COMMENTS section. Who's making you read the comments section? Which ones warrant deletion and why? They seem to be relevant to the topic at hand

You do realize that nobody has a problem with your beliefs as they apply to your own life, correct? Don't want a gay marriage? Don't get one. Don't want to perform gay marriages? Don't perform them.

But extend the same courtesy to others. Freedom of religion means the freedom to reject the Christian faith and all of its teachings. Accept that and we can all get along just fine.

You're the only person trying to impose your code of values onto people that don't believe in them.

Well Jack, the fact remains that you cannot give a single reason to oppose marriage equality other than your faith. Huff & puff all you want, but you still have not given a single example of how a gay couple getting married anywhere would hurt you, any heterosexual marriage or ANYONE. Frankly I don't give a hoot what your beliefs are insomuch as they don't interfer with my life. Neither do I care how you live your life insomuch as it doesn't interfer with mine. If you cannot see how your beliefs are impacting the lives of those who have a different faith or opinion, well you are either blind, self-deluded or just don't care (the last one would make you a petit tyrant).

Now we just have to get past the inevitable court challenge (which will fail), and referendum.

I'm sure. But it's going to be an ugly fight, and far too many months before this actually comes to fruition.

John, the California had equal marriage for 6 months & then a referendum took away those rights. True, twice Federal courts have ruled against the referendum result, but equal marriage in California remains in suspense probably until the US Supreme Court (and we know the court has been packed with a right-wing majority). As long as judges look at the issue ONLY based upon logic, reason & the Constitution, equality wins. But if ideologue judges only look at faith, equality looses. The point is that we must be prepared to defend our victory educating the public how this law helps us & hurts NO ONE.

You certainly can. I don't have an open mind towards trampling on the rights of others for no good reason, and proud of it.

Jack, I am sure the churches will come up with million$ to spend on propaganda against equality. Too bad they never come up with any amount near as much to pay church childhood abuse cases, helping the homeless, poor & destitute, etc. But $ to fight equal marriage, yes, that $ they come up with! And I still await for you to give me ANY non-religious objection to equality.

Yes, you absolutely need a non-religious reason to keep it illegal. If you are truly "fine" with a JoP, then you should support this measure. Like I said before, this measure will not require you to perform any wedding you don't want to.

Well Jack, I'm glad that now that you finally understand that justice of the peace & clerk of court could perform equal marriages, now you support marriage equality. And no, we don't need the holy part, just civil marriage is fine. Thanks for finally understanding.

The problem is that he still won't connect the dots, still preach against this and get his congregation out to try to vote this measure down.

Jack, don't you see you are just arguing about a word? You say you are in favor of civil unions. Unfortunately that concept doesn't encompass all of the benefits & responsibilities of marriage. Don't you realize that if you are willing to give us Super Civil Unions with ALL the benefits & responsibilities of marriage, are you giving us the substance of marriage without the name? And if we can be given the substance, why not the name? You see Jack, the churches won't have to marry us if they don't want. Only those churches that want to & justices of the peace/clercks of court will. So it doesn't affect your religion or life one iota. But for those that need/want it, it will make a difference of good.

As soon as the word "marriage" is removed entirely from the government's lexicon, I'll agree with you.

But as long as the government uses the term "marriage" to describe the union of two people, it will be available to all that seek it regardless of orientation. This country got rid of "seperate but equal" a long time ago for good reason.

The fact that you're willing to deny rights to thousands of people because of the word used to describe it is troubling.

As a Christian, you're absolutely right. Not all of us are the enemy.

Those Christians that would seek to impose their lifestyle on those around them certainly are.

Jack, I do not want enemies be it you, christians, moslems or even aliens from outer space :). I'd rather we all get along fine & cooperate to make this a better world. Communication is the key. Look how you & I have moved along. The real enemy are those forces that use words to divide the people so they may conquer/exploit them. The real enemy is that which makes people like you & me work/sweat so hard, yet takes the fruit of our labors away from us so they may squander in vice & luxuries while their fellow man is being evicted for late mortgage payments, having salaries frozen 3yrs in a row, having their 401k pensions disappear in an instant of Wall Street perfidy. THAT is the enemy! That's after whom we should be going after. If I caused offense, I say that I am passionate too, for marriage does mean MUCH to me too.